(Thimerosal ban) Vaccine Rule Is Said to Hurt Health Efforts

Source: NYT

A group of prominent doctors and public health experts warns in articles to be published Monday in the journal Pediatrics that banning thimerosal, a mercury compound used as a preservative in vaccines, would devastate public health efforts in developing countries.

Representatives from governments around the world will meet in Geneva next month in a session convened by the United Nations Environmental Program to prepare a global treaty to reduce health hazards by banning certain products and processes that release mercury into the environment.

But a proposal that the ban include thimerosal, which has been used since the 1930s to prevent bacterial and fungal contamination in multidose vials of vaccines, has drawn strong criticism from pediatricians.

They say that the ethyl-mercury compound is critical for vaccine use in the developing world, where multidose vials are a mainstay.

2. Pediatricians know the stuff is essential where vaccines

can't be transported and stored under refrigeration. Removing it from lots destined for the Third World is a big mistake.

It's been out of childhood vaccines for enough time that if it caused anything untoward in children, we'd be seeing a huge decrease in that now. Thimerosal was never in the MMR, Wakefield's main target.

The only thing to see now is if lawmakers will listen to doctors who know what they're talking about or medically ignorant people with strong belief systems who don't.

6. Interesting stuff.

8. Excellent response.....

...I find it amazing that there's so much hoopla about thimerisol. For mercury exposure, one of the main culprits are coal fired power plants. Funny, I don't remember any anti-vaxers picketing any power companies. Must have overlooked that. Ummhumm.

12. You and your facts....

The anti-vax crowd can't let this one go, I'm afraid. If they do, then they are back to square one trying to figure out what causes autism. Anti-thimerisol is now religion for some. It is hurting all of us.

43. My only assertion is that we haven't taken an honest look at the

risks. I would not suggest that the risks outweigh the benefits as I don't know. But, I don't believe this is so, from a societal perspective. I do believe potentially vulnerable children should be considered and insulated from the risks, however. I want to identify them if possible, rather than pretend they either don't exist or, are acceptable casualties in the war on disease.

45. "potentially vulnerable children should be considered and insulated from the risks"

They are. Your "only assertion" is wrong. Vaccine safety is a huge consideration into any approval of a new vaccine. It is one of the reasons why there are vaccine shortages from time to time, because there are so few companies approved to safely produce vaccines. And a major reason why vaccines are so important is to raise the level of the herd immunity high enough to decrease the risk of the disease for the individuals who cannot be vaccinated. This is a major tool in insulating these children from the risks of these diseases. And ignorant people who refuse to vaccinate their children put those vulnerable children at risk of illness and death in some instances.

50. No they're not.

There are no alternatives for vulnerable children because they haven't been identified. Unless you're talking about kids on chemo who are exposed to all ages of people, including adults who are about 10 percent compliant with current vaccine recommendations.

I'm aware of the herd immunity arguments, and the suggestion that a single child who isn't vaccinated can make all hell break loose, in spite of this.

53. "a single child..." That is not the herd immunity concept.

A child here and there not being vaccinated does not make all hell break loose. That is the point of herd immunity. But if lots of people don't vaccinate their children - which is what will happen if the anti-vaccine crowd prevails - then herd immunity does break down and people get sick and some die. I don't know if that qualifies as "all hell breaking loose" or not. And in particular, people with dysfunctional immune systems for whatever reason, are more vulnerable. Children with compromised immune systems are more in danger from other children because they are around them more at schools and day care facilities. Also the pediatricians office. This is why most pediatricians require that children they are treating be immunized. (Vets are the same way with cats and dogs) Adults who are around children a lot (school teachers, pediatric nurses, etc) also are required to get immunizations. I got a T- DAP so I would not put my newborn grandchild in jeopardy. This is recommended because newborns cannot be vaccinated until they are several months old. But newborns typically don't go out much - at least they shouldn't for the first several months. Regardless, more people being vaccinated lowers the risk for everyone - and it is not just the people who aren't vaccinated who are at risk. Some people do not respond to the vaccine. They are at risk as well when the herd immunity is low. The ignorance of the anti vaccine crowd notwithstanding, these concepts are quite well understood and there is no scientific reason not to press for wide scale vaccination of populations. It is the major difference between public health in the 1920s when children and adults died in droves from communicable diseases and public health in 2012, when deaths from communicable diseases are relatively rare, even in many third world countries.

54. Actually the claim is made over and over

Achieving herd immunity requires participation from the community at large, not just children. Unfortunately, we have about 10% of adults complying with vaccine recommendations. Contrast that figure to roughly 90% of children who are compliant and then tell me kids are the problem.

58. made by whom and where? And I did not say kids are the problem.

The problem is adults who don't get vaccinated and increasingly, don't want to vaccinate their kids. If these adults have their way then the percentage of kids getting vaccinated will drop and it will become a problem - but of course it would be a problem caused by adults, not kids.

62. Most adults are complying with vaccine recommendations for their children.

64. Many children have complications from vaccinations

There are no studies on combining vaccinations. My one and a half yr old great grandson was extremely ill for 3 weeks after receiving a series of vaccines at the same time. Before the vaccinations, he was talking back to whoever spoke to him and would repeat what you said to him and after the vaccinations, he abruptly stopped speaking completely. We were so freaked out. Five months later he is starting to speak again. If you think we will ever give him another vaccine, you are crazy!

Bobby Kennedy Jr. speaks about the drug companies covering up all the vaccine problems.

19. Dr. Thomas Burbacher

Recent publications have proposed a direct link between the use of thimerosal-containing vaccines and the significant rise in the number of children being diagnosed with autism, a serious and prevalent developmental disorder (for review, see IOM 2001). Results from an initial IOM review of the safety of vaccines found that there was not sufficient evidence to render an opinion on the relationship between ethylmercury exposure and developmental disorders in children (IOM 2001). The IOM review did, however, note the possibility of such a relationship and recommended further studies be conducted. A recently published second review (IOM 2004) appears to have abandoned the earlier recommendation as well as backed away from the American Academy of Pediatrics goal. This approach is difficult to understand, given our current limited knowledge of the toxicokinetics and developmental neurotoxicity of thimerosal, a compound that has been (and will continue to be) injected in millions of newborns and infants.

The key findings of the present study are the differences in the disposition kinetics and demethylation rates of thimerosal and MeHg. Consequently, MeHg is not a suitable reference for risk assessment from exposure to thimerosal-derived Hg. Knowledge of the biotransformation of thimerosal, the chemical identity of the Hg-containing species in the blood and brain, and the neurotoxic potential of intact thimerosal and its various biotransformation products, including ethylmercury, is urgently needed to afford a meaningful interpretation of the potential developmental effects of immunization with thimerosal-containing vaccines in newborns and infants. This information is critical if we are to respond to public concerns regarding the safety of childhood immunizations.

26. Two brief answers:

1. Let those who object to thimerosal offer up an alternative that is as safe and effective as the preservative that they wish to replace. If they can't demonstrate that thimerosal is dangerous--and they can't--then the burden is on them to justify its replacement.

2. Instead of requiring me to explain why a tiny handful of researchers aren't credible, why don't you instead explain why the overwhelming majority of the peer-reviewed studies on the subject (you know, the ones that find no link between thimerosal and mental impairment) aren't credible.

You are once again employing a favorite tactic of the anti-vax crowd: "prove that my idea doesn't work." It's not up to me to prove that anti-vaxers (or anti-thimerosal cultists) are incorrect; it's up to them to prove that they aren't wrong.

27. 1. They have.

2. Watch Thomas Burbacher's presentation below, for answers as to why we need more research before anyone can claim mercury is safe, as long as it's in a vaccine.

3. Mercury is a known neurotoxin. The overwhelming majority of peer reviewed studies, have concluded this long ago.

Burbacher addresses the myth that ethyl mercury is some magically safe formulation of mercury. He calls for more studies and indicates that to his surprise the research on ethyl mercury safety was/is nearly non-existent.

29. Burbacher is a respected scientist and mercury expert, who helped make the case

Dr. Thomas Burbacher, PhD is Professor of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences at the University of Washington (UW) where he teaches classes in basic Environmental and Occupational Health and Children’s Environmental Health. Dr. Burbacher is the Director of the Infant Primate Research Laboratory (IPRL), a core facility supported by the Center on Human Development and Disability (CHDD) and the Washington National Primate Research Center (WaNPRC). He is also a Core Staff Scientist and Head of the Division of Reproductive and Developmental Sciences at the WaNPRC, Deputy Director of the UW Pacific Northwest Center for the National Children’s Study and the Head of the Developmental Toxicology Collaborative Research Area at the CHDD.

Dr. Burbacher has conducted research in the area of Developmental Neurotoxicology utilizing nonhuman primate models for several decades. His research includes landmark studies on the developmental effects of methylmercury, thimerosal and methanol at the Infant Primate Research Laboratory. He has served on several advisory panels reviewing regulations of environmental chemicals, drugs and medical devices including the Environmental Protection Agency, Food and Drug Administration and the National Academy of Sciences as well as panels for the State of Washington.

Watch the presentation when you're at home. It's very informative. Burbacher doesn't conclude that thimerosal unsafe. He calls for more studies.

30. Studies have been going on for decades

And, to date, they have found NO LINK between thimerosal and autism. If Burbacher the mercury expert asserts that such a link exists, or that some as yet unproven danger exists, then let him perform the studies.

In the absence of such studies, and in the face of so many studies demonstrating that thimerosal is safe, then Burbacher is simply yelling fire in a theater. His fears are simply insufficient to justify withholding vaccines from millions of children. If he has such a compelling case to make, then let him make it; it would be dangerously irresponsible to postpone vaccinations on the base of as-yet-unsubstantiated fears.

Brain concentrations of total mercury were approximately 3–4 times lower in the thimerosal group than in the methylmercury group, and total mercury cleared more rapidly in the thimerosal group (with a half-life of 24.2 days versus 59.5 days). However, the proportion of inorganic mercury in the brain was much higher in the thimerosal group (21–86% of total mercury) compared to the methylmercury group (6–10%). Brain concentrations of inorganic mercury were approximately twice as high in the thimerosal group compared to the methylmercury group. Inorganic mercury remains in the brain much longer than organic mercury, with an estimated half-life of more than a year. It’s not currently known whether inorganic mercury presents any risk to the developing brain.

Given these findings, the researchers caution that risk assessments for thimerosal based on studies using blood mercury measurements may not be valid, depending on the design of the study. Further, the observed differences in distribution and breakdown of mercury compounds between exposed groups indicate that methylmercury is not a suitable model for thimerosal toxicity.

The researchers emphasize, however, that the risks associated with low-level exposures to inorganic mercury in the developing brain are unknown, and they describe other research linking persistent inorganic mercury exposure with increased activation of microglia in the brain, an effect recently reported in children with autism. They recommend further research focused specifically on the biotransformation of thimerosal and its neurotoxic potential.​

42. I'll give it a look when I have time tonight

Again, though, we need to recall that studies have been going on for decades, and the overwhelming (near--total) majority have found no link between thimerosal and brain impairment. In fact, even talking about "brain impairment" is a repositioning of the goalposts, since the original (and long-disproven) claim was that thimerosal causes autism.

It is also important to realize that, even if a clear causal link were found between thimerosal and a risk of brain impairment, we would need to compare that risk to the near-certainty that millions of children will die if not vaccinated against pertussus, measles, polio, etc. The researchers are engaged in dangerous speculation, and until they have compelling evidence, they should take care not to cast doubt on a well-established procedure that has saved millions upon millions children.

44. I appreciate your taking a look at the video.

My position is that most children will not suffer long term harm from any vaccine and/or multiple vaccines, obviously. But, I feel we should try to identify those who are vulnerable and offer them alternatives. We can't do that if we pretend that these children don't exist.

48. I recall something similar from a few years ago:

I can't provide a link while I'm at work, but here's the gist:

Plumpynut, a mixture of peanut butter and baby formula, is a powerful tool for combatting hunger and malnutrition. During a discussion of the remarkable benefits of this mixture, an American reporter actually asked "what about children with peanut allergies?"

The question is absurd almost to the point of being offensive, or it would be if such fears were permitted to trump reason. The reporter was asking, in essence, "is it okay to save thousands and thousands of children from death by starvation if it means that a small number of children might suffer a reaction to peanuts?" It reveals an utter failure to understand basic statistics as well as an inability to beform basic risk assessment.

We risk running into a far more absurd situation here: even if the worst-case fears about thimerosal are true, only an infinitessimal percentage of children would be at risk in a massive vaccination program. Are we to sacrifice millions--who surely will die of measles, mumps, polio, pertussus, etc.--to spare a few dozen from the possible risk of some degree of mental impairment?

51. That's another discussion, but here's a brief answer:

Plumpynut allows concentrated delivery of nutrition and life-sustaining calories in way that literally nothing else has been able to match. So the choice is between a product that works astonishingly well with almost zero risk and a product that also presents little risk but which by comparison offers little success. Not really a choice at all.

In addition, it strikes me as a grotesque waste of resources to do skin-scrape allergy testing on a million children prior to providing plumpynut (to continue the example).

If someone wishes to opt out of a procedure, assuming that the person is capable of making such decisions (or has an advocate able to do so), then that person should be allowed to decide, but only when presented with and able to understand the solid, verifiable repercussions of either choice. That means that a few dissenting scientist should not be given equal weight as the (almost) entire body of accepted medicine; elevating the dissenters in that way actually destroys choice, rather than offering it.

Incidentally, the old "why not let people choose?" mantra is of the same stripe as "what's the harm?" and both of these slogans seek to create uncertainty were very little actually exists. It is a dishonest rhetorical tactic and is a cruel disservice to those desparate people who are most vulnerable and who are least able to make informed decisions.

52. Silly as this is getting - I don't believe the claims by big peanut and their surrogates.

Primarily, that there are no viable alternatives. Or, that it's a waste of resources to spare children a life threatening reaction, in order to save their lives.

I don't feel that the makers of Plumpynut should have a corner on the nutrition market, AND have the ability to essentially say die or eat our product - children of the world.

Lastly, a word from our sponsor.

One must never, ever critique Plumpynut, lest they be deemed supportive of killing babies via starvation. Plumpynut saves more lives than it claims and we are not to discuss improving the safety of Plumpynut, ever - as it can't be improved. There is no evidence that peanuts cause allergic reaction in the amounts used in Plumpynut products. Further, if a child is harmed by Plumpynut it's likely coincidental. If not, it was an unavoidable tragedy so stop talking about solutions! We can't solve the problem, because there isn't one.

56. It's less silly than you probably think

I borught up plumpynut as an example of an excellent solution hobbled by thickheaded opposition. Not that opposition is inherently wrong, but when ignorance (of medicine, of nutrition, of statistical probability) is allowed to trump knowledge and fact, then foolish and wasteful policies will invariably follow.

Honestly, I'm not greatly interested in pursuing this much farther with you. I will watch the video, but I know from past discussions that you won't be persuaded by facts or evidence. You have decided that thimerosal is dangerous enough to sacrifice millions of lives in order to protect a few dozen, and if you've gotten to that point then there's really nothing more to say.

61. I understand from a public policy stand-point, that we should find cost effective solutions to mass

problems. And, I appreciate your analogy from that perspective. But I don't think we have to pretend there is only one cost effective solution.

Regardless, I am not of the mind that vaccines be pulled from the market until they're perfect. I just want to continue doing our best to make them less likely to harm the vulnerable among us. Or, at the very least provide alternatives to people who have a family history of various conditions. The CDC claimed years ago that we were now in an era in which we could pursue safer vaccine technology as disease has been largely controlled. I support that initiative.

Mercury has been greatly reduced/removed from most US vaccines, which is a step forward. I hope we continue making progress vs. pretend it's not possible.

I love the Sunshine State! Congressmen Posey asked the toughest questions of CDC and NIH representatives at the recent Congressional Oversight Autism Hearing. Posey and showed incredible leadership in his passionate advocacy for families affected by autism. I know I speak for millions of Americans affected by autism when I thank Posey for giving a voice to our children.

Congressmen Posey is unequivocally pro vaccination. He is pro vaccine safety but anti government waste. Posey knows that our research dollars are too few to squander.

Wow, is Congressman Posey a watchdog for your autism research dollars! Until now the CDC has never been held accountable for autism researcher Dr. Poul Thorsen’s $1 million embezzlement of our research dollars. Thorsen was among the leading authors on 22 NIH /CDC studies. For almost three years the CDC has refused to explain how Thorsen stole this money and what steps have been taken to ensure this does not happen again. Who among us would keep their jobs if someone we were supervising stole over a million dollars? Who among us would keep our job if we refused to explain why an employee stole a million dollars?

Over and over again we were told by Dr. Coleen Boyle that CDC autism research may be laborious but is flawlessly done and held to the highest standards. Yet Thorsen, the premiere autism/thimerasol researcher, author of the of the most widely cited vaccine/autism study is an indicted felon. In fact Thorsen’s studies were so unethical and poorly designed and executed that they would never be published today. Yet the CDC proudly stands by Thorsen’s work. And this is the crazy part- they expect consumers to stand by Thorsen ‘s work as well!

Dr. Boyle’s claim that Dr. Thorsen was just one of many investigators is disingenuous. Please, Thorsen ran the whole Danish operation. Thorsen was the head of the CDC sponsored North Atlantic Neurological Epidemiology Alliance. NANAE received over $5 million from the CDC. Thorsen was, unequivocally, the boss.

Because it is more than reasonable to assume that a corrupt and greedy man wanted by the FBI would not adhere to the strictest ethical and methodological, research standards, Congressman Posey asked if Thorsen’s seminal autism research had been validated by outside independent researchers. After about 5 minutes of hemming and hawing Dr. Boyle finally admitted,” no."

57. Read this carefully please.

PEDIATRICS, the official journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) published three independent editorials that state calling for removal of the mercury-based preservative thimerosal from pediatric vaccines in 1999 was hasty and erroneous. Then, in turn, the authors endorse the position of the World Health Organization (WHO) to exempt thimerosal from the United Nations Environmental Program Global Mercury Treaty currently under negotiation.

PEDIATRICS clearly states the opinions expressed are the authors and not necessarily those of the AAP or its Committees.

Opinions recently published in Pediatrics advance a callous approach to the health of the world’s children. The authors rationalize using a handful of studies they hope will counter well-justified science about exposure to mercury and its known links to brain damage.

The causal link between brain damage and mercury – mercury in any form, especially the organic forms including ethylmercury found in the vaccine preservative thimerosal – has been well-established. Hundreds of articles on studies have been published over the past 75 years by the world’s most respected scientists – whose only association is a shared goal of the scientific search for truth.

Eric Uram, SafeMinds’ Executive Director believes the WHO is seeking help to justify their call to keep mercury in the international vaccine supply. “Obviously the World Health Organization reached out for support in continuing the use of mercury in vaccines given to infants and pregnant mothers. SafeMinds thinks this idea is scientifically and morally bankrupt and vaccine policy-makers should agree with well-established science, researchers and parents in rejecting it.”

The open-ended blanket exemption for the Global Mercury Treaty, proposed by WHO and endorsed by the opinions in Pediatrics, would provide companies with no incentives to change the status quo and could reverse efforts to eliminate mercury exposures. This endangers the welfare of children by perpetuating mercury in pharmaceutical and personal care products (PPCPs) including vaccines in developing countries and opens the potential to the return of mercury preservatives into products, even those where it had already been removed, including US domestic infant and children vaccines.

SafeMinds believes going against the definitive scientific evidence on mercury toxicity would be unprecedented in public health policy. “Frankly, the opinions found in the editorials are not only incorrect; they are irrelevant to an evidence-based vaccine policy. The fact is the science clearly shows all forms of mercury, including thimerosal, are known to affect the brain and are poison to the human body,” said Lyn Redwood, RN, MSN, and Vice-President of SafeMinds.

SafeMinds supports the timely global phase-out of thimerosal from all PPCPs, including vaccines. Technology to provide all children in the world with the safest vaccines possible has a price difference estimated by WHO at about $4 per child and would be more than offset by reduced costs to treat mercury-impacted children and provide a healthier and more productive future workforce.

PEDIATRICS, the official journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) published three independent editorials that state calling for removal of the mercury-based preservative thimerosal from pediatric vaccines in 1999 was hasty and erroneous. Then, in turn, the authors endorse the position of the World Health Organization (WHO) to exempt thimerosal from the United Nations Environmental Program Global Mercury Treaty currently under negotiation.

PEDIATRICS clearly states the opinions expressed are the authors and not necessarily those of the AAP or its Committees.

According to Uram, "Decisions affecting millions of children globally should not be based on opinions but on sound science. Today’s science clearly shows that all mercury exposure is dangerous, especially for children. Mercury is more toxic than lead, and considered the second most toxic element on Earth after plutonium. Justifying injecting it into humans turns science-based policy to protect public health right on its head."

Download science summary highlighting studies that support removal of thimerosal (updated December 2012):